We actually had both prior to seem TPM. They first played the Stooges trailer, then had the little "put your glasses on now" screen, and then we saw trailers for Brave, the Lorax, and the Hobbit. It was cool getting to see the Hobbit trailer on the big screen, can't wait.

I read a couple different reviews of the footage from CinemaCon that said the same thing. The footage was cool, but didn't look great in this new format I guess. A lot compared it to "television looking" I believe.

Hmmm... not sure how I feel about this. Hopefully its not so disruptive to lessen the overall experience. I can't think of a more highly anticipated movie for me since the Fellowship of the Ring came out.

I think what hasn't been said in those pieces is that what's been shown at Cinemacon is likely not a finished product. It's a clip that's been put together for the purposes of expos like this one which primarily focuses on theater owners, as well as studio execs.

48 fps is definitely not going to look like what everyone is used to. Here's something from Slashfilm about the presentation:

Quote

A brief primer: Modern films are shot and projected at 24 frames per second. That has been the industry standard for feature films since the mid-1920s after sound motion pictures were introduced. The low frame rate results in a strobing effect when there is moderate camera movement. You have probably accepted this technological artifacting, but it looks artificial and your brain interprets it as such. Raising the framerate makes movement look a lot smoother, and gives the impression of an enhanced resolution. The low framerate is also one of the major factors of why some people experience discomfort while watching 3D movies.

I get the feeling that the reel that was shown at Cinemacon hadn't undergone the final level of digital grading. And if you go back through your LOTR DVD bonus material you'll find a feature about this very process. Digital grading is generally done after the final cut of the movie, and addresses the lighting and related mood of the movie through processes that aren't all that dissimilar to photoshop.

In a feature like The Hobbit, a scene with some heavy dramatic content may actually be shot in lighting that can seem contrary to the tone of the scene. Especially if there are going to be CGI elements added in post-production. And that's because it's easier to incorporate those CGI elements into a well lit scene so that those elements which are going to potentially be the toughest sell for the audience will look right. After that, with digital grading you're essentially re-lighting the scene to add to the dramatic tone.

All of this being said, I'm not a huge fan of the current crop of 3d movies. But I think that the blur that's been mentioned which is inherent to quick camera moves in the 24 fps format may have something to do with the jarring feeling of some of those viewing experiences. 48 fps will aid in this, but will it affect the feel of the final cut of the movie? Something like this could potentially hurt a movie, but in the grand scheme of things who will be going to see The Hobbit? Certainly not film purists, because much of that crowd has already made their minds up about movies like The Hobbit long before they ever get a chance to see it in theaters.

Logged

"You were entrusted to lead the Republic." - Vote for Ven Zallow from THE OLD REPUBLIC in figure polls!